New DA Revolver Features

[Carry_Up]

Previous posts have commented upon the new Ruger DA designs and whether they are simply copies of S&W. No doubt the pinless ejector star and the 7 round cylinder are similar to S&W. My question would be whether the pin less star actually works better than the earlier version? Due to the ejector springs, the star tends to rotate during ejection. If the parts tolerances are loose - as they are in most Rugers - then the star rotates quite at bit. So, do we have a better solution?

As far as 7 round cylinders my comments are as follows. Traditionally DA cylinders have 6 chambers. If the gun, (i.e. a GP100) was designed for 6 chambers, then by design it should operate best as a 6 shooter. Mis-informed buyers drool over the addition of one round, but the hand now must operate differently than the original design specs. Since most of us have had to clean up every single 6 shooter before it operates smoothly, what hidden problems will appear with 7 rounder cylinders?

Also, the addition of the 7th round takes more metal from the cylinder. After all, the original Ruger reputation was built on heavy-duty design especially for hot .357 loads. It looks as if the heavy-duty concept has now been tossed out. Wow, we really don't admire that thinking at all. Corporate genius at work again.

-CU

 

[Bear Claw Chris Lappe]

How does the number of chambers effect how the hand works?

It does its job the same doesn't it?

Early revolvers had 5 shots, then 6, now 7 and even 8 in some models....

 

[mustang99]

I have a feeling that if someone gave you a million dollar bills, you would complain that they could have just wrote you a check...

 

[WESHOOT2]

The cylinder of the GP has sufficient strength for another hole.

 

[Jimbo357mag]

The cylinder of the GP has sufficient strength for another hole.

Especially if it is in .327mag.

...Jimbo

 

[mustang99]

"Mis-informed buyers " OR posters. The function of the hand (or pawl) is actually less critical when adding a round to the cylinder, since the cylinder has to rotate less to get the next round lined up. And .32 is a smaller diameter than .357 so the walls between chambers are almost the same thickness, if not thicker for the 7-shot .327.

 

[maxpress]

theres 12 shot 22s that work fine.and plenty of 9 shot revolvers that dont have a hitch.
with the 327 being a small round and operating at lower pressure i dont see a strength issue.

 

[WESHOOT2]

I thought the 327 operates at a fairly high pressure.

 

[Jimbo357mag]

I thought the 327 operates at a fairly high pressure.

You are correct. It is more than the 357magnum at 35,000psi and the 30carbine at 40,000psi.
from Wiki:
...the .327 Federal Magnum reaches the velocity levels of the .357 Magnum, if not the same power, with velocities of up to 1400 ft/s (420 m/s) from the short-barreled Ruger SP-101. The case is 1/8" (3 mm) longer than the .32 H&R, and the pressure, at 45,000 psi (310 MPa), exceeds that of the .357 Magnum.

...Jimbo

 

[WESHOOT2]

(I actually knew :shock:, but I didn't want to come off superior-sounding). :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

 

[CraigC]

This post is not even worth responding to.......but I did anyway. :roll:

 

[maxpress]

oops yeah, i read the link below which seems to be missinformed or they were just talking about the fedral low recoil round (why not just drop to a 32hr)

http://www.realguns.com/Commentary/comar168.htm these guys are saying 33k

but just a little more looking reminded me of the 44k. thanks for the correction

still dont see a strength issue with the sp, gp, or blackhawk

 

[TRanger]

If the parts tolerances are loose - as they are in most Rugers -

Since most of us have had to clean up every single 6 shooter before it operates smoothly, what hidden problems will appear with 7 rounder cylinders?

.

-CU

Can't speak for yours, but if the tolerances on my Rugers are loose, you can't tell it by the way they shoot.

Regarding the second statement, I have owned a good many six-shooters; and very few needed "cleaned up" to operate smoothly. Perhaps I just have extraordinary good luck. Was this a serious post?

 

[maxpress]

i have never had a non/bad shooter out of the box from ruger. i have smoothed them up a little but it was never needed.

 

[WESHOOT2]

Oddly(?), I, too, have never owned a poor-shooting Ruger revolver.
Since 1976......